This isn't good... Supreme Court will not take up Sandy Hook-Remington issue

[K Frame]

This is not good at all. It could destroy the 2005 law that protects manufacturers from lawsuits stemming from criminal use of their products.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/12/supreme-court-sandy-hook-remington-guns.html

[T.O.M.]

I'll be interested to see if any other manufacturers file amicus briefs in support of Remington.  Not just gun makers.  Knife makers.  Sporting goods companies (bat makers).  Alcohol companies.  If this suit is successful, I can see enterprising attorneys seeking to use the precedent to go after alcohol companies for DUIs, knife companies for stabbings, bat companies for beatings, etc. 

[MechAg94]

I saw commentary that this appeal to the SC was for the local judges decision to let the trial proceed.  The comment was the SC generally prefers to rule on trial decisions rather than pre-trial rulings.  There is still a long way to go on this one. 

[Pb]

There is still a long way to go on this one. 

I sure hope so.  Otherwise that is bad, bad news.

[K Frame]

I'll be interested to see if any other manufacturers file amicus briefs in support of Remington.  Not just gun makers.  Knife makers.  Sporting goods companies (bat makers).  Alcohol companies.  If this suit is successful, I can see enterprising attorneys seeking to use the precedent to go after alcohol companies for DUIs, knife companies for stabbings, bat companies for beatings, etc. 

Hell, they'll start coming after social media platforms, internet providers, computer and cell phone manufacturers, etc., for providing an arena in which bad ideas can be shares.

[Ben]

Interesting (biased as usual, but not as badly as some) article.

From what I get, antis are playing "lose the battle" (the court case) but "win the war" (gun legislation). They seem to think that discovery will "uncover" the fact that Remington actually markets their guns, including the AR-15. I thought the whole point of selling something included marketing so that it could be sold.

Do they think they're going to uncover some secret marketing plan directed at mass shooters? "You can kill more kids with a Remington than with any other gun!!!"

I'm sure they'll find marketing in the vein of, "The Remington AR-15 is a great rifle when your life depends on it." I guess they think they can twist that kind of marketing into, "the choice of mass murders everywhere"?

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/sandy-hook-lawsuit-force-remington-open-books-67069757

[Firethorn]

Interesting (biased as usual, but not as badly as some) article.

I'm hoping what happens is that they get their day in court.  Then, according to the legislation about suing gun manufacturers, they're made liable for ALL of the court costs.  Including the lawyer firms involved, because they're the ones with money.

Then it gets appealed up to the supreme court, which tells the anti-gunners to suck it.  And pay the extra court costs.  Which aren't dischargeable in bankruptcy, and is attached to many of them not just corporately, but personally.

Indeed, the case itself is stupid because they don't have any proof the shooter(in this case) viewed any of the advertising, he stole the gun after murdering his mother(so at best you have an argument about why SHE bought it, presumably for legal purposes), etc...

[Hawkmoon]

Indeed, the case itself is stupid because they don't have any proof the shooter(in this case) viewed any of the advertising, he stole the gun after murdering his mother(so at best you have an argument about why SHE bought it, presumably for legal purposes), etc...

So Nancy (the shooter's mother) was undergoing gender dysphoria and needed to buy a man card type firearm. :duh:

[WLJ]

Looks like a somewhat similar case in IN

I guess asking for some sort of evidence the city's gangs are influenced in the slightest degree by marketing would be too much to ask. But I guess the feelings are settled on the matter..  

Gary alleges the gun manufacturers engaged in unlawful sales and marketing practices that contributed to increased crime in Gary during the late 1990s, and caused the city to incur significant costs for the resulting criminal investigations and prosecutions, according to court records.

However, in a 3-0 decision, the Court of Appeals ruled the immunity law does not apply to the gun manufacturers’ supposedly illegal marketing and sales practices alleged in Gary’s lawsuit, including condoning straw purchases, failing to restrict sales to corrupt dealers and making false claims about gun safety.

Indiana Supreme Court Refuses to Halt City of Gary Lawsuit Against 10 Gun Makers
https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/indiana-supreme-court-refuses-to-halt-city-of-gary-lawsuit-against-10-gun-makers/

[Pb]

Laws are fictions that the court ignores whenever they want.